31–40 of 143 posts
Funny how something like this is originally posted on a body building forum. I think the first reports of the recent Penn State scandal were posted there too (around a year ago.) Who would have thought that's where you'd first find such things?
Behold, "misc," the /b/ of bodybuilding.com: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/forumdisplay.php?f=19
General form appears to be as follows: http://www.facebook.com/ajax/report/social.php? __a=1& __d=1& attach_additional_photos=1& cid=((FBID))& content_type=0& h=((HASH BASED ON YOUR ACCOUNT))& phase=6& report_id=1& rid=((FBID)) After you get that initial hash then you can swap out the CID and the RID and get everyone else (I tried it for 3)... it's pretty easy. This issue is probably going to make mainstream news by…
General form appears to be as follows: http://www.facebook.com/ajax/report/social.php? __a=1& __d=1& attach_additional_photos=1& cid=((FBID))& content_type=0& h=((HASH BASED ON YOUR ACCOUNT))& phase=6& report_id=1& rid=((FBID)) After you get that initial hash then you can swap out the CID and the RID and get everyone else (I tried it for 3)... it's pretty easy. This issue is probably going to make mainstream news by…
This is a security hole and nothing more. Developers make mistakes. This is not some vast conspiracy by Facebook to undermine your privacy. Why, of all places, is HackerNews unable to comprehend this?
I think it's a stretch to call this "just" a mistake. First of all, there isn't any malicious code that has to be run to execute it, it's a simple as clicking a few buttons in the UI. Secondly, Facebook is a site with hundreds of millions of users managing billions of private photos. With the amount of revenue & number of developers they have, it's inexcusable that they can't think through a simple process like this…
If it wasn't on purpose, it was a mistake. Period.
It might be inexcusable, as you later pointed out, but it was still unintentional. Everyone likes to hate on Facebook. If this was a YC startup, I suspect people would be more forgiving.
This is a security hole and nothing more. Developers make mistakes. This is not some vast conspiracy by Facebook to undermine your privacy. Why, of all places, is HackerNews unable to comprehend this?
This is a security hole and nothing more. Developers make mistakes. This is not some vast conspiracy by Facebook to undermine your privacy. Why, of all places, is HackerNews unable to comprehend this?
Facebook is an excellent personal marketing tool. However, I think at this point you'd have to be a fool to put material on it you want to be private. Of course, what PT Barnum said....
Or possibly didn't say:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theres_a_sucker_born_every_minu...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a stretch to call this "just" a mistake. First of all, there isn't any malicious code that has to be run to execute it, it's a simple as clicking a few buttons in the UI. Secondly, Facebook is a site with hundreds of millions of users managing billions of private photos. With the amount of revenue & number of developers they have, it's inexcusable that they can't think through a simple process like this…
I'm downvoting you for saying I think it's a stretch to call this a mistake If it wasn't on purpose, it was a mistake. Period. It might be inexcusable, as you later pointed out, but it was still unintentional. Everyone likes to hate on Facebook. If this was a YC startup, I suspect people would be more forgiving.
I think the problem is that calling it a mistake downplays the issue. I'd say this is grave negligence, because besides the feature itself, it shows a lack of access control systems.
This is a security hole and nothing more. Developers make mistakes. This is not some vast conspiracy by Facebook to undermine your privacy. Why, of all places, is HackerNews unable to comprehend this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a stretch to call this "just" a mistake. First of all, there isn't any malicious code that has to be run to execute it, it's a simple as clicking a few buttons in the UI. Secondly, Facebook is a site with hundreds of millions of users managing billions of private photos. With the amount of revenue & number of developers they have, it's inexcusable that they can't think through a simple process like this…
I'm downvoting you for saying I think it's a stretch to call this a mistake If it wasn't on purpose, it was a mistake. Period. It might be inexcusable, as you later pointed out, but it was still unintentional. Everyone likes to hate on Facebook. If this was a YC startup, I suspect people would be more forgiving.
It was a mistake, but another word for a mistake is 'negligence'. The fact that something like this can happen illustrates systemic shortcomings at the company. Millions of people are depending on them to enforce the privacy restrictions Facebook claims to enforce. Facebook encourages you to store highly personal data, and as such, they have a responsibility to be more careful. Facebook prides themselves on constantly pushing changes to their software. More safeguards, testing, and perhaps slowing down the software development cycle a little would not be a bad idea.